On Thursday 23 October 2003 20:35, Jay Lessert wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 07:53:32PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Thursday 23 October 2003 09:32, Dan Willis wrote:
>> >Hello. I am still experimenting with my Amanda setup. I have
>
>[clip]
>
>> Generally speaking, dump is not the prefered utility for use with
>> amanda.  We seem to have gradually come to prefer tar, in any
>> version 1.13-19 or higher.
>
>Gene, though that is the conventional wisdom for Linux ext2/ext3
>because of kernel buffer inconsistency issues, I don't think Dan
>mentioned his OS; for some OS's, like Solaris, (ufs)dump is arguably
>the preferred solution unless you require excludes or
> subdirectories.

Most of the comments I've read on this list from folks who have run 
dump, seem to be less than enthusiastic after it bites them in a 
recovery attempt.

Maybe there are platform diffs that make it ok here, and a drooling 
dog someplace else.  Its my impression that tar doesn't seem to have 
quite a much negative publicity as long as its new enough, and it 
does do excludes and subdirs quite nicely, allowing one to break up 
his disklist into bite sized pieces.  But thats just my impression 
Jay... That, and a buck might get you a cup of coffee in a small 
town. :-)

-- 
Cheers, Gene
AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP@1400mhz  512M
99.27% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.